TSN: Extensive TSN Interview with Kyle Dubas tonight.

[Mess]

if that's KD's definition of "we before me" then he should have practiced what he preached and either signed JT for a sub market contract -8.5m-9m per- or walked away from negotiations

Willie signing for what his comparables got is not "top market" $$$ , it's just fair value and even if he and the others say took a small discount of say 500k it's not like 1.5m total would make much of a difference .

Article below supporting this: Link: Time could make sorting out Maple Leafs contracts even tougher - Sportsnet.ca

Kyle Dubas shouldn’t be doubted when he says that there’s enough cap space to sign Auston Matthews, Mitch Marner and William Nylander to their second NHL contracts, but what remains to be seen is how much is left for everyone else once those deals are eventually done.

The newly minted Leafs general manager has spent the summer reminding agents about the importance of the greater good. To wit: If each player takes a little less than absolute market value, the Leafs will have a better chance of keeping their core intact and chasing championships for a sporting generation.

It’s the next phase of a long-held plan inside the organization’s executive boardroom. Team president Brendan Shanahan cited it as one of the reasons his Detroit Red Wings were able to sustain a strong run of success in the late 1990s and early 2000s during an appearance on "Prime Time Sports" last September. The Hall of Fame winger said he was comfortable taking a little less in his playing days “because I was in a winning environment that I enjoyed coming to work every day."

"And so rather than work on hypotheticals [with the Leafs] we try to control what we can control," Shanahan continued. "Which is we want this to be the kind of place that – similar to like I just said – where I was in an organization at one point in my life where players knew that they could get more if they went to unrestricted free agency and knocked on all 30 doors, but instead we want to create an environment here in Toronto where players want to stay and they want to grow up together and have an era of hockey together."

Matthews, Marner and Nylander each get a say in whether that actually happens. On one hand, it buys some time. More time for Dubas to sell everyone on the “we before me” philosophy. More time to ascertain exactly where the NHL’s salary cap is headed in 2019-20 and beyond.

 

[hotpaws]

Article below supporting this: Link: Time could make sorting out Maple Leafs contracts even tougher - Sportsnet.ca

Kyle Dubas shouldn’t be doubted when he says that there’s enough cap space to sign Auston Matthews, Mitch Marner and William Nylander to their second NHL contracts, but what remains to be seen is how much is left for everyone else once those deals are eventually done.

The newly minted Leafs general manager has spent the summer reminding agents about the importance of the greater good. To wit: If each player takes a little less than absolute market value, the Leafs will have a better chance of keeping their core intact and chasing championships for a sporting generation.

It’s the next phase of a long-held plan inside the organization’s executive boardroom. Team president Brendan Shanahan cited it as one of the reasons his Detroit Red Wings were able to sustain a strong run of success in the late 1990s and early 2000s during an appearance on "Prime Time Sports" last September. The Hall of Fame winger said he was comfortable taking a little less in his playing days “because I was in a winning environment that I enjoyed coming to work every day."

"And so rather than work on hypotheticals [with the Leafs] we try to control what we can control," Shanahan continued. "Which is we want this to be the kind of place that – similar to like I just said – where I was in an organization at one point in my life where players knew that they could get more if they went to unrestricted free agency and knocked on all 30 doors, but instead we want to create an environment here in Toronto where players want to stay and they want to grow up together and have an era of hockey together."

Matthews, Marner and Nylander each get a say in whether that actually happens. On one hand, it buys some time. More time for Dubas to sell everyone on the “we before me” philosophy. More time to ascertain exactly where the NHL’s salary cap is headed in 2019-20 and beyond.

and what does Shanny's example have to do with the 3 kids who are rfa's ?

if he wants to base there salaries off taking a discount on speculation of what they could get as ufa's i'm sure that would be more than acceptable to MNM

and considering none of the 3 have been signed so far i'm guessing they haven't bought into the teams "we before me" definition yet

 

[drewjenks]

So if Dubas didn't fluke into Tavares his adds would have been two very overrated players vs their contracts. How is that progressive thinking like many in this thread are claiming?

Shanny will always have final say on moves. The point is Dubas job was to work the trade talks for Kessel. Shanny had hand picked him to be the future GM. In a short period he went from running point on the biggest trade the team was going to make in that era to having zero say on acquisitions for the big club. That seems like a failure to me. Lou came in and fixed things and helped set the franchise up for the next decade . Dubas now gets to benefit from that.

This is very flawed logic...and it's all based on theoretical information.

"So if Dubas didn't fluke into Tavares"

Speculation 1 - Was it a fluke? (Tavares did state that Dubas pitch was "unique, thorough & hard to ignore").

"So if Dubas didn't fluke into Tavares, his adds would've been two very overrated players vs their contracts" (referring to Calvin DeHaan & Derek Ryan)

Speculation 2 - Were they his targets? (One media member: "Dubas would have targeted them if xxx").
Speculation 3 - Would he overpay? (You: "overrated vs their contracts" as if Dubas signed the contracts).
Speculation 4 - Did he sign DeHaan? (Maybe that's because Carolina overpaid & Dubas correctly refused to).
Speculation 5 - Did he even pursue Ryan? (There was no need - yet you criticize Dubas theoretical offer?).

"How is that progressive thinking like many in this thread are claiming?"

Speculation 6 - You can judge non-existent events? (You: "is that progressive?". Me: "that" didn't happen).
Speculation 7 - You assume all posters are aware this speculation? (Regarding non-existent events).
Speculation 8 - You assume all posters believe this speculation? (Regarding what Dubas might have done).
Speculation 9 - You assume all posters agree with your opinions on this speculation? (Confidant man).
Speculation 10 - You assume all posters factor points 7-9 into their claims of Dubas "progressive thinking".

"Shanny will always have final say on moves. The point is Dubas job was to work the trade talks for Kessel".

Speculation 11 - Will Shanny always have final say? (Always is a very long time).
Speculation 12 - Was he responsible for Kessels trade talks? (Has anyone within the Leafs said this?)

"In a short period he went from running point on the biggest trade the team was going to make in that era to having zero say on acquisitions for the big club. That seems like a failure to me.".

Speculation 13 - This all happened? (or is it just you speculating on the speculations of another person?).
Speculation 14 - You think your source was wrong? (Your source claims that the bad Kessel trade was all Dubas fault, which infers that management allowed him to make the trade without any approval. But you mentioned that Shanahan always has final say. So if Shanahan approved Dubas trade proposal, he must have approved of Dubas work on the trade, so why would he then punish Dubas & remove him from all trades?).
Speculation 15 - Seems like a failure? (Fair enough, but that's just speculation on speculation on speculation).

"Lou came in and fixed things and helped set the franchise up for the next decade . Dubas now gets to benefit from that".

Speculation 16 - Lou fixed Dubas mess? (Truth = Lou did very little. Every major piece was here before Lou).
Speculation 17 - Lou set the franchise up for a Decade? (Truth = Lou was short sighted & hurt us long-term).
Speculation 18 - Dubas gets to benefit all of Lou's great work? (Speculation on speculation).


How did Lou step in & set the franchise up for the next decade?

All of the following players were here before Lou (except Matthews, who was a non-decision):

FORWARD = Matthews, Marner, Nylander, Kadri, Brown, Hyman, Johnsson
DEFENSE = Rielly, Dermott, Gardiner

Virtually all of Lou's recent decisions will hurt the Leafs (and Dubas) in the long-term:

1) Trading a 2nd + prospect to rent Boyle
2) Trading a 2nd + prospects to rent Plekanec
3) Signing Matt Martin - $2,500,000 x 4 years (Lou took him back as a favor)
4) Signing Nikita Zaitsev - $4,500,000 x 7 years (Cap hit & term are too high)
5) Signing Patrick Marleau - $6,250,000 x 3 years (Term is 1-year too long)
6) Letting JVR walk (instead of trading for assets in summer 2017)
7) Letting Bozak walk (instead of trading for assets in summer 2017)
8) Letting Komarov walk (instead of trading for assets in summer 2017)

The lasting effect of these decisions equate to the loss of:

1) $8,000,000 in cap-space next season (when we'll need it most).
2) 1-2 round 1 picks (JVR & possibly Bozak's summer 2017 value)
3) 3-4 round 2 picks (Boyle trade, Plekanec trades & Komarov's summer 2017 value )

 

[GodEmperor]

Seems like a very smart guy, cringed insanely hard when I heard his "straight white male" bit though, I hope to God he's not one of those sports figures.

Good to see he likes thinking fast and slow, but I would've preferred Principles by Ray Dalio or 80/20 Rule by Richard Koch or even anything by Nassim Taleb.

 

[Kubus]

When I think bridge I'm thinking 3-4 years, not 1-2.
There is savings vs. a 7-8, and significant long term advantages over a 5-6.
And the bolded simply is not true if you look beyond the term of the initial contract.

And how many top line talent take 3-4 bridge deals? Guys like Nylander generally either get long term or very short term bridge deals(1-2 years). The 3-5 year deals are for guys you aren't sure about they might be 1st line but might be 3rd line players.

 

[Menzinger]

And how many top line talent take 3-4 bridge deals? Guys like Nylander generally either get long term or very short term bridge deals(1-2 years). The 3-5 year deals are for guys you aren't sure about they might be 1st line but might be 3rd line players.

Yeah I basically either seen it as a two-year bridge or more likely a six or seven longer-term deal

 

[Sypher04]

How did Lou step in & set the franchise up for the next decade?

All of the following players were here before Lou (except Matthews, who was a non-decision):

FORWARD = Matthews, Marner, Nylander, Kadri, Brown, Hyman, Johnsson
DEFENSE = Rielly, Dermott, Gardiner

Virtually all of Lou's recent decisions will hurt the Leafs (and Dubas) in the long-term:

1) Trading a 2nd + prospect to rent Boyle
2) Trading a 2nd + prospects to rent Plekanec
3) Signing Matt Martin - $2,500,000 x 4 years (Lou took him back as a favor)
4) Signing Nikita Zaitsev - $4,500,000 x 7 years (Cap hit & term are too high)
5) Signing Patrick Marleau - $6,250,000 x 3 years (Term is 1-year too long)
6) Letting JVR walk (instead of trading for assets in summer 2017)
7) Letting Bozak walk (instead of trading for assets in summer 2017)
8) Letting Komarov walk (instead of trading for assets in summer 2017)

The lasting effect of these decisions equate to the loss of:

1) $8,000,000 in cap-space next season (when we'll need it most).
2) 1-2 round 1 picks (JVR & possibly Bozak's summer 2017 value)
3) 3-4 round 2 picks (Boyle trade, Plekanec trades & Komarov's summer 2017 value )

I definitely agree with some of your post. All the speculation being passed as fact.
Now don't get me wrong, I'm not some huge Lou supporter but this section I quoted I don't think is especially fair at all.

1) 2nd + Byron Froese was a very reasonable price to pay for a 4C, and in that season there was a strong argument we needed one to stabilize things. Given the narrow margin with which we made the playoffs, I don't think you can at all consider it a given we make it without that trade and as such, as an investment, that deal was 100% worth it. This was not the case with the Plekanec deal which I wasn't a big fan of.
2) Even if Matt Martin didn't help us that much, any by almost all accounts he was tremendous presence in the room (intangible), he certainly didn't hurt us, and with him gone, really it's no harm no foul on the fact he was badly overpaid.
3) Marleau doesn't come without year 3. So you can lament that third year, but it kind of is what it is if you believed the player could help your young guys learn and grow.
4) 100+ point pacing, playoff bound teams don't trade 35+ goal scorers, and their only center depth after their #1 & #2. They just don't

Also, you should give Lou credit for acquiring Andersen who has an argument as our MVP through the last 2 years. He also cleared the entirety of Dion Phaneuf's contract from our cap. negotiated the Rielly & Kadri extensions which are both beauties. Acquired Carrick for Winnik. Hell, most of the 2nd's he traded he acquired for trading guys like Polak & Spaling beforehand.

 

[hotpaws]

I definitely agree with some of your post. All the speculation being passed as fact.
Now don't get me wrong, I'm not some huge Lou supporter but this section I quoted I don't think is especially fair at all.

1) 2nd + Byron Froese was a very reasonable price to pay for a 4C, and in that season there was a strong argument we needed one to stabilize things. Given the narrow margin with which we made the playoffs, I don't think you can at all consider it a given we make it without that trade and as such, as an investment, that deal was 100% worth it. This was not the case with the Plekanec deal which I wasn't a big fan of.
2) Even if Matt Martin didn't help us that much, any by almost all accounts he was tremendous presence in the room (intangible), he certainly didn't hurt us, and with him gone, really it's no harm no foul on the fact he was badly overpaid.
3) Marleau doesn't come without year 3. So you can lament that third year, but it kind of is what it is if you believed the player could help your young guys learn and grow.
4) 100+ point pacing, playoff bound teams don't trade 35+ goal scorers, and their only center depth after their #1 & #2. They just don't

Also, you should give Lou credit for acquiring Andersen who has an argument as our MVP through the last 2 years. He also cleared the entirety of Dion Phaneuf's contract from our cap.

And I'll add re signing Rielly and Kadri to great value deals as well as making Lupul and Robidas deals disappear .

 

[Sypher04]

And I'll add re signing Rielly and Kadri to great value deals as well as making Lupul and Robidas deals disappear .

Lol, funny enough, I was just editing that into mine

 

[4thline]

And how many top line talent take 3-4 bridge deals? Guys like Nylander generally either get long term or very short term bridge deals(1-2 years). The 3-5 year deals are for guys you aren't sure about they might be 1st line but might be 3rd line players.

Kucherov for one.

 

[Nithoniniel]

Man, @drewjenks might not give us a large quantity of posts, but there's no complaining about the quality. Not mentioning Andersen is an oversight though, he's one of the two big positives Lou brought.

 

[Daisy Jane]

This is very flawed logic...and it's all based on theoretical information.

"So if Dubas didn't fluke into Tavares"

Speculation 1 - Was it a fluke? (Tavares did state that Dubas pitch was "unique, thorough & hard to ignore").

"So if Dubas didn't fluke into Tavares, his adds would've been two very overrated players vs their contracts" (referring to Calvin DeHaan & Derek Ryan)

Speculation 2 - Were they his targets? (One media member: "Dubas would have targeted them if xxx").
Speculation 3 - Would he overpay? (You: "overrated vs their contracts" as if Dubas signed the contracts).
Speculation 4 - Did he sign DeHaan? (Maybe that's because Carolina overpaid & Dubas correctly refused to).
Speculation 5 - Did he even pursue Ryan? (There was no need - yet you criticize Dubas theoretical offer?).

"How is that progressive thinking like many in this thread are claiming?"

Speculation 6 - You can judge non-existent events? (You: "is that progressive?". Me: "that" didn't happen).
Speculation 7 - You assume all posters are aware this speculation? (Regarding non-existent events).
Speculation 8 - You assume all posters believe this speculation? (Regarding what Dubas might have done).
Speculation 9 - You assume all posters agree with your opinions on this speculation? (Confidant man).
Speculation 10 - You assume all posters factor points 7-9 into their claims of Dubas "progressive thinking".

"Shanny will always have final say on moves. The point is Dubas job was to work the trade talks for Kessel".

Speculation 11 - Will Shanny always have final say? (Always is a very long time).
Speculation 12 - Was he responsible for Kessels trade talks? (Has anyone within the Leafs said this?)

"In a short period he went from running point on the biggest trade the team was going to make in that era to having zero say on acquisitions for the big club. That seems like a failure to me.".

Speculation 13 - This all happened? (or is it just you speculating on the speculations of another person?).
Speculation 14 - You think your source was wrong? (Your source claims that the bad Kessel trade was all Dubas fault, which infers that management allowed him to make the trade without any approval. But you mentioned that Shanahan always has final say. So if Shanahan approved Dubas trade proposal, he must have approved of Dubas work on the trade, so why would he then punish Dubas & remove him from all trades?).
Speculation 15 - Seems like a failure? (Fair enough, but that's just speculation on speculation on speculation).

"Lou came in and fixed things and helped set the franchise up for the next decade . Dubas now gets to benefit from that".

Speculation 16 - Lou fixed Dubas mess? (Truth = Lou did very little. Every major piece was here before Lou).
Speculation 17 - Lou set the franchise up for a Decade? (Truth = Lou was short sighted & hurt us long-term).
Speculation 18 - Dubas gets to benefit all of Lou's great work? (Speculation on speculation).


How did Lou step in & set the franchise up for the next decade?

All of the following players were here before Lou (except Matthews, who was a non-decision):

FORWARD = Matthews, Marner, Nylander, Kadri, Brown, Hyman, Johnsson
DEFENSE = Rielly, Dermott, Gardiner

Virtually all of Lou's recent decisions will hurt the Leafs (and Dubas) in the long-term:

1) Trading a 2nd + prospect to rent Boyle
2) Trading a 2nd + prospects to rent Plekanec
3) Signing Matt Martin - $2,500,000 x 4 years (Lou took him back as a favor)
4) Signing Nikita Zaitsev - $4,500,000 x 7 years (Cap hit & term are too high)
5) Signing Patrick Marleau - $6,250,000 x 3 years (Term is 1-year too long)
6) Letting JVR walk (instead of trading for assets in summer 2017)
7) Letting Bozak walk (instead of trading for assets in summer 2017)
8) Letting Komarov walk (instead of trading for assets in summer 2017)

The lasting effect of these decisions equate to the loss of:

1) $8,000,000 in cap-space next season (when we'll need it most).
2) 1-2 round 1 picks (JVR & possibly Bozak's summer 2017 value)
3) 3-4 round 2 picks (Boyle trade, Plekanec trades & Komarov's summer 2017 value )

i love this.
(lou did get andersen though)

 

[deletethis]

Can't wait for the tantrums and/or the backpeddling when Dubas trades future assets at the 2019 trade deadline and doesn't trade or re-sign Gardiner.

 

[Menzinger]

While I liked some of Lou’s moves, it was a pity his second half or so with the team wasn’t as strong as his first few months.

@drewjenks does a great job summing up the more controversial parts of his tenure and in particular the jury is still out on how the Marleau/Zaitsev contracts will impact the team moving forward (and I say this as somebody who likes Marleau a lot)

 

[Daisy Jane]

Can't wait for the tantrums and/or the backpeddling when Dubas trades future assets at the 2019 trade deadline and doesn't trade or re-sign Gardiner.

it will make me v. mad.

 

[LeafsNation75]

Can't wait for the tantrums and/or the backpeddling when Dubas trades future assets at the 2019 trade deadline and doesn't trade or re-sign Gardiner.

I know they are not the same situation but seeing as Dubas traded Matt Martin who we all know didn't have that much of a future with the Leafs, I can't see him making a mistake and not trading Gardiner if he felt like he could not re-sign him.

 

[Muston Atthews]

I know they are not the same situation but seeing as Dubas traded Matt Martin who we all know didn't have that much of a future with the Leafs, I can't see him making a mistake and not trading Gardiner if he felt like he could not re-sign him.

You’re comparing Matt Martin, a guy who was a healthy scratch for the second half of the season to Jake Gardiner who is the leafs 2nd best dman

 

[LeafsNation75]

You’re comparing Matt Martin, a guy who was a healthy scratch for the second half of the season to Jake Gardiner who is the leafs 2nd best dman

I only brought him up because Dubas saw that Babcock would not play him if he didn't have to and traded him the first chance he got.

 

[Nithoniniel]

I only brought him up because Dubas saw that Babcock would not play him if he didn't have to and traded him the first chance he got.

Gardiner played the fifth most ES minutes in the league last season. Babcock plays him every chance he gets, and likely will continue to do so.

 

[LeafsNation75]

Gardiner played the fifth most ES minutes in the league last season. Babcock plays him every chance he gets, and likely will continue to do so.

I have no doubt that will continue to happen. I just think that if Gardiner is not re-signed prior to the trade deadline it will be a higher chance Dubas trades him so they get something in return, the way Lou did not trade JVR or Bozak last season.

 

[ToneDog]

Man, @drewjenks might not give us a large quantity of posts, but there's no complaining about the quality. Not mentioning Andersen is an oversight though, he's one of the two big positives Lou brought.

Moving Phaneuf was also not mentioned. It was all up from there.

 

[kb]

Gardiner played the fifth most ES minutes in the league last season. Babcock plays him every chance he gets, and likely will continue to do so.

I don't think it's wise to keep burning top assets as own rentals though. So sign him prior to puck drop on the season, or trade him if he isn't going to be resigned. A one year own rental on a team that doesn't quite ready to win it all seems like very poor asset management, and we all realize that Dubas is about asset management.

 

[Nithoniniel]

I don't think it's wise to keep burning top assets as own rentals though. So sign him prior to puck drop on the season, or trade him if he isn't going to be resigned. A one year own rental on a team that doesn't quite ready to win it all seems like very poor asset management, and we all realize that Dubas is about asset management.

As a general rule, I agree with you. But Gardiner might just carry such importance to us, while his reputation on the market doesn't really seem to be that great. Could be that what we get for him won't be enough to offset how much losing him will hurt our chances.

My issue with last season was that Komarov and Bozak had value, and could have seamlessly been replaced within the organization. That's a lot of value lost for not much gain.

 

[BodaciousBeefBazooka]

Do y'all think this captain talk is just a smoke screen and they will actually pick a captain? Not right away but perhaps early in the new year?

 

[hotpaws]

As a general rule, I agree with you. But Gardiner might just carry such importance to us, while his reputation on the market doesn't really seem to be that great. Could be that what we get for him won't be enough to offset how much losing him will hurt our chances.

My issue with last season was that Komarov and Bozak had value, and could have seamlessly been replaced within the organization. That's a lot of value lost for not much gain.

Komo could have been easily replaced but had little value .

We had no one to replace Bozak without negatively affecting Mathews line and while he held more value than Komo it still wasn't high .

jVR was the one who had the high value but we had no one to replace him and teams in our situation don't weaken themselves at the t/d.